Timing Boosters: Part II. Rapidly boosting at-risk people during surges would save lives and be more cost effective than annual "boosters-for-all" campaigns. It's time for insurers to do their part.
As a high risk person, I'm dismayed by the FDA annual shot proposal when we continue to have waves that are not seasonal.
While I agree hypothetically with your proposal, I think it involves collaboration, innovation and is just beyond the scope of realistic expectations. I wish it was possible.
At this point, I'd just appreciate the option for a second bivalent booster--and as data on waves is nearly impossible to find--and I track hospitalizations, cases, waste water--I just have no faith in the the local or federal public health response to be nimble enough to track waves and act on them.
My northeast county went red recently and absolutely nothing happened.
What would you think about assigning people to "boarding groups"?
Those patients at highest risk (for whatever reasons) would be assigned to "Group A", those with somewhat elevated risk "Group B", most people "Group C", and those for whom there are concerns about the risks of the vaccine itself (e.g., younger males) "Group D".
With such a system, we could not only say that Group A gets boosted more frequently than the others, but perhaps there might be lower threshold for community spread that would get the relevant authorities to say "If you are in Group A or Group B, now is the time to get boosted; Groups C and D should hold off for now."
It's a coarse-grained method of trying to address both the population-level and individual outcomes.
If only...
As a high risk person, I'm dismayed by the FDA annual shot proposal when we continue to have waves that are not seasonal.
While I agree hypothetically with your proposal, I think it involves collaboration, innovation and is just beyond the scope of realistic expectations. I wish it was possible.
At this point, I'd just appreciate the option for a second bivalent booster--and as data on waves is nearly impossible to find--and I track hospitalizations, cases, waste water--I just have no faith in the the local or federal public health response to be nimble enough to track waves and act on them.
My northeast county went red recently and absolutely nothing happened.
What would you think about assigning people to "boarding groups"?
Those patients at highest risk (for whatever reasons) would be assigned to "Group A", those with somewhat elevated risk "Group B", most people "Group C", and those for whom there are concerns about the risks of the vaccine itself (e.g., younger males) "Group D".
With such a system, we could not only say that Group A gets boosted more frequently than the others, but perhaps there might be lower threshold for community spread that would get the relevant authorities to say "If you are in Group A or Group B, now is the time to get boosted; Groups C and D should hold off for now."
It's a coarse-grained method of trying to address both the population-level and individual outcomes.